Re: [Zen] If you save a life
Hello Tim: Preventing to commit suicide is a very noble intention. May I ask you how do you intent to prevent that to happen to your friend?. What is going to be your action here to persuade your friend?. Thanks Mayka --- On Sun, 19/9/10, tim timg...@aol.com wrote: From: tim timg...@aol.com Subject: [Zen] If you save a life To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, 19 September, 2010, 2:14 The Jews and Muslims share a saying: If you save a life, it's as if you saved the world. That's rather Zen also. The truth is out there. That's a X-File term. I have a friend who is has been very resistant to letting me or anyone or herself try to end her death wish and painful way of being. But I'm gong to be very insistent in till she decides to try and save her life or tells me to get lost. The soft sell for 15 years has not worked. I all ready mailed her one hell of a letter. It got a thank you but has not worked magic yet. Tim
[Zen] Re: Sharing religions
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, audreydc1983 audreydc1...@... wrote: Yep, I agree with you - the situation in Australia is a whole different (although somewhat similar) can of worms. But - honestly - couldn't John Howard have just issued a statement to the Aboriginal people acknowledging the mistakes of the past? If I were Australian, I would BALK at him apologizing for me, or white people in general for what happened then. Anyone can apologize for anyone to anyone if one interprets apologize to mean that one is aware of and feels compassion (or wants to develop empathy and caring) for all those native peoples who were killed off, robbed of their lands, enslaved and degraded. In inter-group relations usually one does not *feel* much compassion for persons outside one's national, racial, ethnic, religious, genetic, friendship or kinship group. The sad truth is that the Aboriginals (like the Native Americans, and countless other peoples) were overcome by force: better technology and firepower. That can't be changed - especially by a sorry from one white politician. The sorry means that we recognize and empathize with the pain and suffering of all humans - and that can help establish our connection with all humans. I asked myself, about a year ago, WHY our ancestors had better technology (and therefore an advantage in conquering less developed nations)in the first place - and with luck, I stumbled upon this book, called 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' in my local library: http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552 http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552 It's a fascinating read. We already know the how of it happening, but here's an interesting theory as to the why of it all. It's good chatting with you all! ~Aud I think it attempts to underscore the 'how'; the 'why' lies in human motivation and intentions. As Buddhism reminds us, all that we think, feel and do is driven by our motivations and intentions, conscious and unconscious. Guns and steel are quite harmless without the human tribal tendency to profit at the expense of those outside one's group. It's good chatting with you too, Aud. ~ED
Re: [Zen] Re: Sharing religions
Mayka; I almost never disagree with anything you right, but I think you are being excessively cynical here. The West has caused so much havoc over other cultures because of the conditions they found themselves in, not because of some enduring badness in them. The Guns, Germs Steel book is a very interesting look at the conditions that differentiated the Western countries from the rest of the world - as far as developing modern technology, the West really got very lucky, even down to tiny details like the size of grass seeds of the wild grasses in different areas and the orientation (horizontal) of the landmass which allowed agricultural innovations to be shared, where as in the Americas crops that grow in Mexico can't grow so well in Brazil or New York. If the native cultures had had access to the more powerful technology that the West randomly had access to, the odds are that mistakes would have been make. The native american cultures did hunt to extinction almost all of the large mammals that were here when they got here. People are people; look to the conditions to explain the differences. --Chris On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 1:16 AM, Maria Lopez flordel...@btinternet.comwrote: *Audrey Wrote:* *I asked myself, about a year ago, WHY our ancestors had better technology (and therefore an advantage in conquering less developed nations. * *---* *The expression of less develop nations is no more than a very ignorant idea invading countries have over other countries to excuse themselves for the destruction and imposition of their own culture over other cultures. But most of it to exploit them, stealing and slavery them in many ways. My view about the human race is that the bad people are always the winers and the ones who promote real civilization based are always the losers. Undevelop or Develop countries is just a wrong perception we all have about different cultures based in our own wrong perceptions.* ** *Mayka* --- On *Sat, 18/9/10, audreydc1983 audreydc1...@yahoo.com* wrote: From: audreydc1983 audreydc1...@yahoo.com Subject: [Zen] Re: Sharing religions To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, 18 September, 2010, 23:02 Yep, I agree with you - the situation in Australia is a whole different (although somewhat similar) can of worms. But - honestly - couldn't John Howard have just issued a statement to the Aboriginal people acknowledging the mistakes of the past? If I were Australian, I would BALK at him apologizing for me, or white people in general for what happened then. The sad truth is that the Aboriginals (like the Native Americans, and countless other peoples) were overcome by force: better technology and firepower. That can't be changed - especially by a sorry from one white politician. I asked myself, about a year ago, WHY our ancestors had better technology (and therefore an advantage in conquering less developed nations)in the first place - and with luck, I stumbled upon this book, called 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' in my local library: http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552 It's a fascinating read. We already know the how of it happening, but here's an interesting theory as to the why of it all. It's good chatting with you all! ~Aud --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.comhttp://uk.mc862.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, mike brown uerusub...@... wrote: Hi Audry and Artie, It's quite a different situation in Australia regarding Aboriginal people. When the conservative leader John Howard was in power he refused to say 'sorry' to the indigenous people despite being called upon to do so for a number of years. His argument was similar to both yours: that he wasn't personally responsible for the crimes committed by people of a different generation. The Aborigines point, however, was that policies enacted by a different government still affects Aborigines today (for example, taking 'half-blood' Aboriginal kids from their mothers and putting them into foster care or Christian missions - just because they had white blood in them). Furthermore, people living in Australia today live on the land that was traditionally Aboriginal land and was taken without payment. Does kinda make a point that white people living on land taken from the native people (nearly always by force) do share responsibility with those people from a different generation. To say, Sorry is to recognise that there is no 'break' from the past (how convenient for whte landowners, eh?) and that we continue to enjoy what was once somebody elses without due recognition. Mike ps Audrey, I used to be in the British infantry and have great respect for the US Marines (not as good as the Brit Army, but still damn good!)  :
[Zen] Re: Sharing religions
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Chris Austin-Lane ch...@... wrote: The West has caused so much havoc over other cultures because of the conditions they found themselves in, not because of some enduring badness in them. No there is no enduring goodness or badness in *any* ethnic, racial, religious, cultural or national group. The conditions the West found itself in was one of military and economic superiority, and they used that power to exploit other groups - which is what powerful groups historically have done, driven by Darwinian imperatives. If the native cultures had had access to the more powerful technology that the West randomly had access to, the odds are that mistakes would have been make. No 'mistakes' were made by the West. No 'mistakes' would have been made by the natives. Power does not corrupt, it is used to the advantage of those who possess it. People are people; look to the conditions to explain the differences. --Chris Yes, and the primary condition is: Which groups have the most power. --ED
Re: [Zen] Re: Sharing religions
Hello Chris: Have I been excessively cynical???. In which way?. I don't understand. I'm surprise of your feedback. , Howevr, I stick to what I wrote because this is the way I see it.. Sorry if that sound as an offense to you. Mayka. --- On Sun, 19/9/10, Chris Austin-Lane ch...@austin-lane.net wrote: From: Chris Austin-Lane ch...@austin-lane.net Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Sharing religions To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, 19 September, 2010, 18:16 Mayka; I almost never disagree with anything you right, but I think you are being excessively cynical here. The West has caused so much havoc over other cultures because of the conditions they found themselves in, not because of some enduring badness in them. The Guns, Germs Steel book is a very interesting look at the conditions that differentiated the Western countries from the rest of the world - as far as developing modern technology, the West really got very lucky, even down to tiny details like the size of grass seeds of the wild grasses in different areas and the orientation (horizontal) of the landmass which allowed agricultural innovations to be shared, where as in the Americas crops that grow in Mexico can't grow so well in Brazil or New York. If the native cultures had had access to the more powerful technology that the West randomly had access to, the odds are that mistakes would have been make. The native american cultures did hunt to extinction almost all of the large mammals that were here when they got here. People are people; look to the conditions to explain the differences. --Chris On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 1:16 AM, Maria Lopez flordel...@btinternet.com wrote: Audrey Wrote: I asked myself, about a year ago, WHY our ancestors had better technology (and therefore an advantage in conquering less developed nations. --- The expression of less develop nations is no more than a very ignorant idea invading countries have over other countries to excuse themselves for the destruction and imposition of their own culture over other cultures. But most of it to exploit them, stealing and slavery them in many ways. My view about the human race is that the bad people are always the winers and the ones who promote real civilization based are always the losers. Undevelop or Develop countries is just a wrong perception we all have about different cultures based in our own wrong perceptions. Mayka --- On Sat, 18/9/10, audreydc1983 audreydc1...@yahoo.com wrote: From: audreydc1983 audreydc1...@yahoo.com Subject: [Zen] Re: Sharing religions To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, 18 September, 2010, 23:02 Yep, I agree with you - the situation in Australia is a whole different (although somewhat similar) can of worms. But - honestly - couldn't John Howard have just issued a statement to the Aboriginal people acknowledging the mistakes of the past? If I were Australian, I would BALK at him apologizing for me, or white people in general for what happened then. The sad truth is that the Aboriginals (like the Native Americans, and countless other peoples) were overcome by force: better technology and firepower. That can't be changed - especially by a sorry from one white politician. I asked myself, about a year ago, WHY our ancestors had better technology (and therefore an advantage in conquering less developed nations)in the first place - and with luck, I stumbled upon this book, called 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' in my local library: http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Germs-Steel-Fates-Societies/dp/0393317552 It's a fascinating read. We already know the how of it happening, but here's an interesting theory as to the why of it all. It's good chatting with you all! ~Aud --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown uerusub...@... wrote: Hi Audry and Artie, It's quite a different situation in Australia regarding Aboriginal people. When the conservative leader John Howard was in power he refused to say 'sorry' to the indigenous people despite being called upon to do so for a number of years. His argument was similar to both yours: that he wasn't personally responsible for the crimes committed by people of a different generation. The Aborigines point, however, was that policies enacted by a different government still affects Aborigines today (for example, taking 'half-blood' Aboriginal kids from their mothers and putting them into foster care or Christian missions - just because they had white blood in them). Furthermore, people living in Australia today live on the land that was traditionally Aboriginal land and was taken without payment. Does kinda make a point that white people living on land taken from the native people (nearly always by force) do share responsibility with those people from a different generation. To say, Sorry is to recognise
RE: [Zen] If you save a life
Tim, You wrote: [Tim] I have a friend who is has been very resistant to letting me or anyone or herself try to end her death wish and painful way of being. But I'm gong to be very insistent in till she decides to try and save her life or tells me to get lost. The soft sell for 15 years has not worked. I suggest you continue with the 'soft sell' that has not worked for another 15 years. And then another, and another... ...Bill! __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 5462 (20100919) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [Zen] Re: Sharing religions
The sentence I was disagreeing with is: On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Maria Lopez flordel...@btinternet.comwrote: My view about the human race is that the bad people are always the winers and the ones who promote real civilization based are always the losers. It certainly doesn't offend me that you believe this! If I believed that myself, I'd be sadder than I am, but reasonable people disagree as they say. :-) --Chris
Re: [Zen] Re: Sharing religions
Well, the interesting thing in Guns, Germs and Steel is that the conditions of power arose from other more picayune conditions to do with the distribution of seed sizes and domesticable animals and the orientation of continents. It really wasn't an innate lust for power either, just a simple randomness as to which group of humans would develop technology first, assuming all the groups are pretty similar in intelligence and motivations and behavior. --Chris On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 11:03 AM, ED seacrofter...@yahoo.com wrote: People are people; look to the conditions to explain the differences. --Chris Yes, and the primary condition is: Which groups have the most power. --ED
